So Exploratory Testing gets a bad wrap… mainly because including in exploratory testing is “Monkey Testing” as some call it… which is just banging on stuff.
People ask me “How do you find so many bugs?” This is exactly how I find them:
When I refer to exploratory testing, I’m referring to my own modification of Session based testing. I am targetting testing out a feature in the product. More specifically if I know how things are put together I am targetting vulernabilities in the system.
Some of the stuff that Kaze had told me helped to identify what is a l12y bug and what is a l10n bug.
To give you an idea of what I accomplished in about 4 hrs time yesterday, I had tested 2 builds (2 different builds from kaze due to gonk issues) in less than 1 hr each and found 39 possible issues. I then did verification of to check to make sure that it is an issue on the standard build so that I can report them for about another 1.5 hrs. (this includes write up). I found 11 bugs, 1 was a dup, 2 are blockers. ( http://bit.ly/11ieiy5 )
If we were to count test case equivalency check, I ran through ui in all the apps as quickly as I can… which basically means I ran through at least 100 test cases or so if not for each build (I’m guessing ~ 230 as a conservative number) without having to spend the added amount of time to create the test, modify the test after ui gets changed due to the bugs, etc. And yes. I do verify my bugs on a general basis.
So now you know how I find so many bugs.
Filed under: mobifx, mobile, Planet, QA, QMO Tagged: mobifx, mobile, Planet, QA, QMO 
